If there's one over-used buzzword currently making the rounds in the technology industry, it's 'post-PC world' - or the notion that desktops and laptops are a dying breed. Todd Bradley, executive vice president of HP's printing and personal systems group, thinks this is a nonsensical notion - and he's right.

The origin of the "app store" has been thoroughly debated on this forum, most recently when Apple and its fanboys tried to float the notion that Apple invented the concept of the "app store."

Huh? I am openly telling you that Apple did not invent the app store when I recognize that there were precursors. l2read.

Linux repositories and package managers are "app stores" which have existed since the late 1990s...If a fanboy later adds the irrelevant condition that one pays for apps in Apple's model, one merely need mention Lindows/Linspire CNR (Click-N-Run), a paying Linux repository/package-manager which existed five years before the first Iphone

Irrelevant? You've gutted a key part of my argument, which was that the tablet successfully combines a form factor that's OK for PC-ish work with the app store delivery and payment model. The fact that they found a way to make the payment side work is of utmost importance to closed source participation and, what I am ultimately arguing, the widespread adoption of a particular hardware platform.

At any rate, neither Linspire CNR (of which I actually have an old CD that a friend gave me) nor package managers like Debian's (which is what CNR is based off of) are anywhere near as successful as the major app stores in reaching consumers. I am talking about the first, massively successful, general purpose app store that found its way onto a screen form factor that's good enough for doing serious work.

BTW, "a zillion myriad apps downloaded" is not exactly true. I doubt that Debian has more than 30k packages (let alone apps), and that's one of the bigger ones; it is miniscule compared to the app stores in terms of number of apps and probably even number of downloads. But, of course, this is not what I am arguing; I am arguing based on overall number of users.

Evidently, the Apple fanboys think that combining "app" with "store" was an inspired stroke of genius by none other than "Steve" (Jobs).

How can you call me a fanboy? Is it not obvious from my original post that I find this trend detestable? Hell, I don't even like package management let alone app stores. That's why I use Slackware ;-)

"
The origin of the "app store" has been thoroughly debated on this forum, most recently when Apple and its fanboys tried to float the notion that Apple invented the concept of the "app store."

Huh? I am openly telling you that Apple did not invent the app store when I recognize that there were precursors. l2read. "

Which means if you did not recognized these precursors(due to ignorance or unwillingness to read history) that there are similar app stores(software repositories) in the past before the unveiling of Apple's app store, you will credit to Apple the concept of an app store?

It seems praising Apple is the default behavior of Apple fans, until corrected, but then again, the praise and honor was already credited to Apple.

Which means if you did not recognized these precursors(due to ignorance or unwillingness to read history) that there are similar app stores(software repositories) in the past before the unveiling of Apple's app store, you will credit to Apple the concept of an app store?

Me: P was the first of Q that was also A, B, and C. tupp: Y u claim that P was the first of Q?? Me: No, you have misunderstood me: P was the first of Q that was also A, B, and C. P had precedents; P was not the first of Q in an absolute sense. allanregistos: Y u claim that P was the first of Q??

It seems praising Apple is the default behavior of Apple fans, until corrected, but then again, the praise and honor was already credited to Apple.

Me: ...and therefore, the situation that Apple has created is not good. tupp: Y u Apple fanboi?? Me: No, you have misunderstood me: the situation that Apple has created is not good. allanregistos: Y u Apple fanboi??

Linux repositories and package managers are "app stores" which have existed since the late 1990s...If a fanboy later adds the irrelevant condition that one pays for apps in Apple's model...

Irrelevant? You've gutted a key part of my argument, which was that the tablet successfully combines a form factor that's OK for PC-ish work with the app store delivery and payment model.

I make no comment on the success of the combination of tablets, "PC-ish" work and a paying app store -- I simply point out that Apple (nor any other tablet maker) was decidedly not the first to combine such elements.

Furthermore, I now add to my argument that adding a payment method to a repository/app-store (regardless of the "form factors" of the related hardware) is as obvious as any idea can get.

The fact that they found a way to make the payment side work is of utmost importance to closed source participation...

As shown in my link above, that "payment side" was found for PCs at least five years before the first Iphone.

And, again, adding a payment method to a repository is an excessively obvious notion and would have been an extremely easy task right after the first web "shopping cart" system appeared.

At any rate, neither Linspire CNR (of which I actually have an old CD that a friend gave me) nor package managers like Debian's (which is what CNR is based off of) are anywhere near as successful as the major app stores in reaching consumers. I am talking about the first, massively successful, general purpose app store that found its way onto a screen form factor that's good enough for doing serious work.

I see... So, now, on top of the argument given in the original post, we are suddenly adding the subjective condition that the repository/app-store must be "massively successful."

This new development in the debate is certainly a surprise.

BTW, "a zillion myriad apps downloaded" is not exactly true. I doubt that Debian has more than 30k packages (let alone apps), and that's one of the bigger ones; it is miniscule compared to the app stores in terms of number of apps and probably even number of downloads. But, of course, this is not what I am arguing; I am arguing based on overall number of users.

I will directly address this new "quantity/success" argument, but first I would like to make an observation.

On this forum, years before the Iphone app store, those arguing with Apple fanboys would often cite the Debian repository and its thousands (18,000-20,000, at the time) of available apps as an advantage of over the relatively small number of apps for OSX. Invariably, the Apple fanboys would respond with a subjective, qualitative criticism to the effect of, "Well, those apps are mostly half-baked with a bad UI!"

Well, what percentage of the apps in the "massively successful" Apple app stores are actually robust and universally useful programs that get work done, instead of some stupid widget that makes farting noises, or the equivalent of someone's vanity fan web page, or some store's shopping application, or someone's shallow, generic app idea that they think will make them a quick fortune, etc.?

I am glad that the Debian repository has 30,000 "half-baked, bad UI" and useful programs (conceived by actual coders), rather than the millions of pretty, insipid pieces of sh*t found in Apple's app stores.

Now, in regards to this new quantity/success argument, adding the condition that an app store must be a "massive success" has no bearing on whether or not an app store is an app store.

In addition, what constitutes "massive success" is totally subjective.

I don't know the total number of apps over the past 14 years that have been downloaded from Linux repositories, but I think that it is safe to say that the number would be over 100 million. The Click-N-Run app store alone had over 9 million paid downloads. Those are "massively successful" numbers, especially considering that Linux has had practically zero advertising/marketing since its inception.

By the way, most Linux userland apps work with large-screen "PC-ish" hardware as well as smaller screens. So, the "form factor" is immaterial.

Let me also make a quantity/quality/success music analogy. Miley Cyrus and Justin Beiber sell more songs than the Beatles. Who is the most "massively successful" -- Miley Cyrus, Justin Beiber or the Beatles? I think that you will find that different people give differing answers to this music success question (the Beatles, by far, would be my answer).

Likewise with computer platforms. Even when specifying exact quantities, success is a subjective argument.

How can you call me a fanboy?

Where did I call you a fanboy? I have not even addressed you directly, until this comment.

I make no comment on the success of the combination of tablets, "PC-ish" work

Yes, but that is my ultimate point. I'm only arguing about the app store bit because ultimately I am trying to say something about the convergence of a model that became successful on smartphones (the iPhone originally) and that is now making its transition to PC's, which themselves are partly merging into/becoming tablets.

I simply point out that Apple (nor any other tablet maker) was decidedly not the first to combine such elements.

Of course. Totally agree with you. Rather, I'm saying that Apple's app store happened to be the first one to meet certain conditions, the key ones being that it was wildly successful and that it had apps for doing PC-ish work.

Furthermore, I now add to my argument that adding a payment method to a repository/app-store (regardless of the "form factors" of the related hardware) is as obvious as any idea can get.

Agreed. Look, I'm not trying to suggest that Apple is somehow "innovative", I'm just saying that they happened to be first (again: not first to create an app store nor first to create an app store that requires money; but that they were the first to be so successful and include a wide variety of apps). I think the fact that payment is part of it is important in the sense that it helps grow the ecosystem and therefore enhances the appeal of the hardware platform, but if open source or "free as in beer" ecosystems were wildly popular then that would work just as fine.

I see... So, now, on top of the argument given in the original post, we are suddenly adding the subjective condition that the repository/app-store must be "massively successful."

Yes, I see that I should have been more specific in my original post. I thought it was implied when I wrote "successful implementation", but probably my vagueness is the root of the misunderstanding. My fault, my apologies.

On this forum, years before the Iphone app store, those arguing with Apple fanboys would often cite the Debian repository and its thousands (18,000-20,000, at the time) of available apps as an advantage of over the relatively small number of apps for OSX. Invariably, the Apple fanboys would respond with a subjective, qualitative criticism to the effect of, "Well, those apps are mostly half-baked with a bad UI!"

Well, what percentage of the apps in the "massively successful" Apple app stores are actually robust and universally useful programs that get work done, instead of some stupid widget that makes farting noises, or the equivalent of someone's vanity fan web page, or some store's shopping application, or someone's shallow, generic app idea that they think will make them a quick fortune, etc.?

Well, I am not one of those fanboys and I am not making that argument. You seemed to be alluding to app numbers; my criterion is number of users, not even app quality.

Now, in regards to this new quantity/success argument, adding the condition that an app store must be a "massive success" has no bearing on whether or not an app store is an app store.

...duh? When did I even imply that? I keep repeating: "Apple did not invent the app store!"

In addition, what constitutes "massive success" is totally subjective.

Now you have the exact definition that I am working with.

I don't know the total number of apps over the past 14 years that have been downloaded from Linux repositories, but I think that it is safe to say that the number would be over 100 million. The Click-N-Run app store alone had over 9 million paid downloads. Those are "massively successful" numbers, especially considering that Linux has had practically zero advertising/marketing since its inception.

Obviously, number of downloads =/= number of users.

By the way, most Linux userland apps work with large-screen "PC-ish" hardware as well as smaller screens. So, the "form factor" is immaterial.

lolwhut?

Let me also make a quantity/quality/success music analogy. Miley Cyrus and Justin Beiber sell more songs than the Beatles. Who is the most "massively successful" -- Miley Cyrus, Justin Beiber or the Beatles? I think that you will find that different people give differing answers to this music success question (the Beatles, by far, would be my answer).

Likewise with computer platforms. Even when specifying exact quantities, success is a subjective argument.

Not if you are defining it in a very limited sense for the purpose of making a specific argument. Subjective =/= relative.

Where did I call you a fanboy? I have not even addressed you directly, until this comment.

Sorry, you seemed to be implying it since you were disagreeing with me and then tacked on a bunch of stuff about how fanboys act.

<blockquote> I don't know the total number of apps over the past 14 years that have been downloaded from Linux repositories, but I think that it is safe to say that the number would be over 100 million. The Click-N-Run app store alone had over 9 million paid downloads. Those are "massively successful" numbers, especially considering that Linux has had practically zero advertising/marketing since its inception. </blockquote>

ITunes does a Billion software downloads every few weeks. Which means they are doing over your 100m figure per day every day. And don't forget a noticeable percentage of those are paid downloads. Now the phone software market is nowhere near the size of the desktop software market yet. But the growth in both units and sales per unit are staggering.